https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=295303 Judicial review of concurrent forfeiture findings is limited: the High Court will not reappraise evidence or substitute its view where the competent authority and appellate authority acted within jurisdiction, followed fair procedure, gave notice, and recorded reasons. Interference lies only if the decision is irrational, unreasonable, procedurally unfair, or perversely unsupported. On the facts, the petitioner's proved association with a detenu justified initiation and confirmation of forfeiture proceedings under the statute, and the writ challenge could not reopen that factual nexus in the absence of a glaring anomaly. The forfeiture order therefore remained undisturbed. en-us Fri, 06 Dec 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 28 May 2021 08:37:31 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=295303 Judicial review of concurrent forfeiture findings is limited: the High Court will not reappraise evidence or substitute its view where the competent authority and appellate authority acted within jurisdiction, followed fair procedure, gave notice, and recorded reasons. Interference lies only if the decision is irrational, unreasonable, procedurally unfair, or perversely unsupported. On the facts, the petitioner's proved association with a detenu justified initiation and confirmation of forfeiture proceedings under the statute, and the writ challenge could not reopen that factual nexus in the absence of a glaring anomaly. The forfeiture order therefore remained undisturbed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 06 Dec 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=295303